Does it matter that the camera does not have image stabilization? Do you get blurry pictures? I was looking for an entry level DSLR
18529
Both lenses that come with it are vibration reduction lenses. The images are great. I would recommend this package.
18530
I believe my lenses have stabilization. Regardless, my pictures are far from blurry unless I make a mistake.
435055
I wouldn't be so worried about the image stabilization as I would about the overall auto focusing capabilities of this lens. For a new photographer and first time DSLR user, you might find that it's hard to take focused images, especially indoors. I am an experienced photographer and bought this lens to have an 'all-in-one' option for traveling, for times I didn't want to bring my entire gear bag out. The focus was so horrible I sold the lens to a pawn shop. I would highly recommend spending a bit more money and purchasing the Canon equivalent.
1908113
Keep the ISO to 400 or below, 800 max and you will be fine for detailed images. You can push it a little higher if you don't plan to blow the pictures up really large. Yes, its about 1-2 stops worse than other cameras, but the camera features and the 16-50 f/2.8 kit lens more than make up for it. If you can't work around 1-stop, then you probably shouldn't be considering a camera at this level.
1221901
Hi Austin, Yes It has image stabilization. It has Pan Smoothing, stabilization amount and rolling shutter correction. Hope this helps. Randell
474712
I can tell you from experience that the Nikon P500 is not a good camera for stabilization. The new P510 might be but I haven't tested that one. I did test the P500 several times and was disapointed with it. I haven't tested the canon sx40 but you may want to test both cameras before making a decision. I bought a sony HX100 after testing it and finding out it had great stabilization and low light performance when I tested it. You may want to try testing it along with the other cameras before you make a decision to buy one.
1595880
Yes it does have image stabilization. I have had this camera for a couple of years. It is great fro wildlife, landscape and action.
1128233
It does not have optical image stabilization but does have digital stabilization. For a cam with optical image stabilization you are going to have to spend more $.
1974760
No stabilization. However, you would not really need it unless you are planning on shooting with very small apertures, in which case I'm not sure why one would buy this lens. This is an absolutely phenomenal lens BTW.
959173
Shutter lag isn't really a problem, but I would be concerned about the need for low ISO (200 max) unless you're shooting b&w;, in which case, it is simply a lovely camera.
1615162
You might, especially in low light conditions. As long as the light is good you should be alright. You can always look at the image you just took, and determine what adjustments need to be made. A bigger problem is stabilizing camera and lens to zero motion, since it's all manual there is no vibration reduction / stabilization.
583381
If you have the shakes, I wouldn't buy it. No, I think you have to steady, but not like a rock. I've not had problems with blurry pictures.
354758
The image stabilizer is a good feature of a digital camera but it more helps for people who can't hold a camera still. I had my mom wave her hand back and forth and the picture still came out still. I also took a picture of a girl on those wheelie sneakers and she didn't come out blurry either.
1199805
The camera is good. I've used it for instagram and posting to fb. Sometimes it looks grainy but need to make sure the settings are on the highest resolution/pixels possible.
314103
Looks like others have already answered your question...so I'll just add that I'm very happy with the camera...it's sharp and the controls are reasonably easy to use...love the 11 frames per second drive (not at the very highest resolution, but you can use a higher resolution for, I believe, 8 frames per second), the manually operated zoom, and the waist level finder...lots of capability for the price...lots of people buy dSLRs who don't need one...unless you're going to make large prints (16x20 or larger) this camera should be all you need.
2258091
I used my canon only a few times. Did not try the video, but I found out that if you do not hold the camera steady the shots come out very blurry. It seems impossible to get a clear shot because the camera is too small.
1847491
The optical image stabilization used for still images is very good. The sensor is an older version of current sensors (this is a $250 body) so it has some noise. The digital stabilization for video is about what one would expect. On a tripod, the camera gives excellent video. Hand-held, it isn't as good as a dedicated video camera (as one would expect). It's a good camera for the price IMO. A nice, impartial review can be found at dpreview dot com. I added an excellent Richard Franiec handgrip to the too-smooth body. (Google him if you're interested).
402925
Only if you're using it for video. One can shoot without stabilization if on a tripod, steadycam or even possibly a monopod. Video shot handheld will be unwatchable. Still photography should be unaffected by the lack of image stabilization.